Systematic reviews: Screen on title and abstract in Covidence

This is where screening records on titles and abstracts fits into the systematic review process:

This is how screening looks in Covidence:

Covidence records statistics of each process in accordance with the PRISMA flow chart so that you don't have to.

• How to create and manage keyword and phrase highlights (from Covidence Support)
• Example of how this looks from the above instructions:
• 

When screening records on title and abstract in Covidence, sorting by relevancy enables machine learning.

As you choose to include or exclude records the software learns which records are most likely relevant and brings them to the top of the list. This means that relevant results will filter through to the next steps more quickly.

This is especially useful if you have several team members who can work on different stages of the review at the same time.

You can easily add tags to records which other reviewers can see. You can then filter by those tags. You can also add notes which other reviewers can see. 

• How to create and manage study tags (Covidence Support)
• You can see tags at the bottom of this screenshot, as well as the option for notes.
• 

When two reviewers disagree on whether to include or exclude a record during screening there needs to be a way to break the tie. Common methods include:

• A third reviewer resolves the conflict - this is often a supervisor or senior member of the team who has limited time for the usual screening
• Two (or more) reviewers discuss each conflict until agreement is reached

Whichever method you use, it needs to be consistent and described as part of the methodology.

This is how it looks in Covidence:

Clicking on "Resolve conflicts" takes you to this screen: